The Swedish captain in the Fourth Generation War seminar I lead at for the U.S. Marine Corps at Quantico, Va. recently introduced me to (a new) word. It is the Swedish word for military intelligence: underrättelser. The literal translation of underrättelser is “correction from below“.
“What a remarkably instructive term for military intelligence! The more I have thought about it, the more “correction from below” has seemed to capture the essence of what good military intelligence requires — and what American military intelligence too often lacks.
Regrettably, in this Second Generation War model, the garbage cannot be acknowledged as such. The motto is, “Garbage In, Gospel Out.”
We could, of course, learn from the Swedes and make “correction from below” definitional to our intelligence process, just as we could learn from the Germans and adopt mission order tactics instead of issuing detailed, controlling orders.
But when you are the self-proclaimed “greatest military in all of history,” why should you learn from anyone else? Just as blindness leads to hubris, so hubris leads inevitably to blindness.
Very interesting article. Usually I save structural military pieces for the weekend. Thought I’d drop this one into the hopper on Friday morning for anyone up to clicking the link — and reflecting upon the questions asked by Lind.
Shirley you jest?
Does anyone expect conservative or liberal American politicians to accept anything other than the Walt Disney/John Wayne theory of history? All we need is another Davy Crocket to lead us to victory at the Alamo.
Oh.
[edited: comments guide]
In 1950 Dr. W. Edwards Deming proved to the Japanese and the world that shit should run uphill. Well, most of the world, we Americans conducted business as usual.
Too funny. I just got censored at Dvorak Uncensored! I just read the comments guide and will try again.
I thought this website would be more based on tech/business since that’s how I found out about Dvorak. I notice a lot of these posts are not put up by Dvorak. Does he approve of all of these posts? The above post and others are so slanted, even those in favor of the ideas put forward have to be insulted.
“Garbage in, Gospel out” is less the tone of the US military and more the tone of this kind of post.
#4 — you were excised for wasting space. The comments guide is clear that the several editors and John will post about whatever topic they wish. The history of this blog is equally clear on that topic. Ad hominem time-wasting because you don’t approve of a topic is also covered in John’s Guide.
There is a list of contributing editors at the Masthead. It’s almost up-to-date. We’ve added 2 more folks recently: 1 in the UK and 1 in Canada.
Further, you appear to be confusing the opinion piece written by an instructor at the Marine College as fronting for some liberal plot. Try clicking the link and reading further. Some parts of the military actually allow for criticism and discussion.
Better yet, try contributing to a discussion of the topic.
Cripes. I’d forgotten there were tooled-leather patches for some units in WW2.
Thank you for the explanation. I followed the link, and clearly missed the meaning of the article when I misread the blurbs and posted.
#7 — don’t be so agreeable and understanding. Eideard can read the weather forecast aloud and make it sound cranky!
Underrättelser is “correction from below“.
Underrättelser is plural, so the more correct translation is Corrections from below. Singular of Underrättelser is Underrättelse.
And yes, it’s a more instructive term for military intelligence.
I actually know William S. Lind, author of the article is question.
Lind is extremely smart, and has a knack for actually explaining things clearly, unlike the bloviators in most so-called think-tanks.
You can see more of his stuff at http://www.d-n-i.net.
#4 – intracoast
The full name of the blog might also suggest, upon thoughtful consideration, that controversial and contentious topics are featured…
I clicked on the link because William Lind is one of the clearest thinkers on military matters I’ve ever encountered. No crap, just clear thinking. Anyone who has read up on his concept of fourth-generation warfare will recognize the utter folly of the Bush/Cheney strategy in Iraq and the Middle East, even granting the very dubious assumption that what the Bushies are up to is what they claim they’re up to.
The USMC is all about being effective in the field, and to hell with the ideological agendas that create the situations they have to wade in and deal with. (So my son the Marine told me and I believe him.) No wonder the Marines have asked Lind to act as an instructor. That’s entirely consistent with my understanding of how the Marines operate.
You ask me, they ought to just scrap the whole Joint Chiefs and turn the military over to the Marines. They may have had Ollie North, but they have plenty of honor and good sense to make up for it. And none of the Marines I’ve met have expressed anything but contempt for Ollie so clearly he wasn’t the norm.
Now the USMC has engaged William Lind as an instructor? Good for them.
Is military intelligence an oxymoron
“Correction from Below” would require the startling organizational self-realization that sometimes your “inferiors” actually know what’s going on at the human interface level better than people from above who are trying to justify their hubris-hardened, pre-engineered conclusions.
TikiLoungeLizard is no doubt right. It’s the same barrier against unwanted information that corporate headquarters MBAs put in place. To be willing to listen to input from below you first have to understand that you’re not God and that more information is empowering, not threatening.
To see what happens when self-important morons with a tenuous grasp on reality and an “I’m the decider” attitude get too much power, look at the Bush administration and the Iraq war or at Congress and the drug war.